The Level of Motivation towards New Normal Learning of the Grade 12

students

of St. Paul University Iloilo

A Research Proposal Presented

To the Senior High School Department of

St. Paul University Iloilo

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements

For Practical Research 2

By:

Gorriceta, Jann Paul

Gulmatico, Nicole Alexandrein

Lima, Lizdel Shanez

Sobretodo, Anne Paulene

Tambalo, Mary Zusie Lyn

September 2020

1
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

CONTENT PAGE

ABSTRACT 3

1. INTRODUCTION 4

1.1 Problem Statement 6

1.2 Hypothesis 6

2. BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY 6

3. METHODOLOGY 8

3.1 Participants 8

3.2 Methods 9

3.3 Ethical Issues 10

3.4 Analysis 10

4. RESULTS 11

5. DISCUSSION 15

6. CONCLUSION 17

7. RECOMMENDATIONS 18

8. REFERENCES 19

APPENDICES 24

Letter of Permission to Conduct Research Study 24

Consent Form 25

Research Questionnaire 26

SPSS Results 30

2
Abstract

Motivation is the reason why one person is acting towards something. It

is what drives us to commit and focus on achieving our goals. It stimulates

and sustains learning behavior. It is important to identify the motivational

level of students towards learning especially in this time of pandemic together

with the implementation of ‘new normal’ learning. With that, 180 students

participated in this research conducted to determine the level of motivation

towards new normal learning of the grade 12 students and to specify the

differences on motivational level of students in terms of sex, internet

connectivity, and socioeconomic status. Academic Motivation Scale (AMS)

which was developed by Vallerand et al. (1992, 1993) was used as a data

collection tool in this research. Descriptive and Inferential Statistics such as

Mean, T-test and ANOVA were applied to determine the overall level of

motivation of students and differences in the motivational level when grouped

according to variables. Results showed that the students have ‘high’ level of

motivation by adopting the interpreting procedure designed by Best (1981)

and Degang (2010). Also, findings revealed that there is no significant

difference on the level of motivation of students when grouped according to

sex. However, when classified according to Internet Connectivity and

Socioeconomic Status, the students’ level of motivation varies from each

other.

3
1. Introduction

The whole world has slowed down as Covid-19 pandemic impacted

societies and economies. This global health crisis affected so many people

especially in the field of education. It has resulted to school closures across

the world creating a drastic change in the field of learning. Schools have been

the second home of the students but because of this pandemic, the

Department of Education implemented the ‘new normal’ learning where

students will attend classes virtually through online platforms in the comfort

of their homes. With this sudden shift, students are stressed out adopting to

this new way of learning because of the different situations and instances.

There are students who struggle technologically to participate in this digital

learning, thus their motivation to learn may be affected in these trying times.

Motivation is the process that initiates, guides, and maintains goal-

oriented behaviors. It is what causes you to act, whether it is getting a glass

of water to reduce thirst or reading a book to gain knowledge. Problems in

motivation are very common in education. It is one of the frustrations of the

teachers whenever their students are unmotivated to learn. Students’

motivation to learn, to engage actively in learning and to persist in difficult

situations while learning independently and/or being in class are topics that

have kept researchers in the academics and educators on all school levels,

nationally and internationally, occupied for the past decades (Fullan &

Langworthy, 2013, 1; Hattie 2012, 21 & 23; Hattie 2009, 6).

4
 Online Learning has been the new normal mode of classes for students

today. Students are encouraged to learn online instead of face to face

interaction for it is very risky. According to Top Hat (2018), an online class is

a course conducted over the Internet. They are generally conducted through

a learning management system, in which students can view their course

syllabus and academic progress, as well as communicate with fellow students

and their course instructor. Excite Education (2020) stated that, the main aim

of online education is to help students earn higher education no matter where

they are located. The key benefits of online education are low costs, no

traveling required, self-paced coursework, and time flexibility.

For those who do have access to the right technology, there is evidence

that learning online can be effective in a number of ways. However, the

effectiveness of this new education system varies among students. This

depends on their willingness to go beyond replicating a physical class through

video capabilities. Basically, Internet Connection is the most significant factor

in learning online. Therefore, in this study, the speed of internet connection

students experience is referred to as ‘Internet Connectivity’.

In this study, the researchers investigated important theoretical

constructs related to this study. This was followed by a description of

research procedures and the presentation of the results. Next the researchers

provided a detailed discussion of the findings. The paper will be concluded by

outlining implications for educational policies and future directions of

research. The generalization of this study could be a great insight and will be

beneficial.

5
1.1 Problem Statement

This study aims to determine the Level of Motivation towards New

Normal Learning of the Grade 12 students of St. Paul University Iloilo.

Specifically, this study seeks to answer these questions:

1. What is the profile of the respondents in terms of a) Sex, b) Internet

Connectivity, and c) Socioeconomic Status?

2. What is the level of motivation as a whole and in terms of profile?

3. Is there a significant difference on the Level of Motivation towards

New Normal Learning of the Grade 12 students when they are classified

according to Sex, Internet Connectivity, and Socioeconomic Status?

1.2 Hypothesis

The Alternative Hypothesis follows:

1. There is a significant difference between the Level of Motivation

towards New Normal Learning of the Grade 12 students when they are

classified according to Sex, Internet Connectivity, and Socioeconomic Status.

2. Background of the Study

The concept of motivation is closely related to other constructs in

education and psychology. They include attention, needs, goals and interests

which all focuses on stimulating individual learners and rising their interest

and attention towards engaging in an action or behaviors and the

6
accomplishment of such actions or goals. Gottfried (1990) defines academic

motivation as “enjoyment of school learning characterized by a mastery

orientation; curiosity; persistence; task-endogeny; and the learning of

challenging, difficult, and novel tasks”. Educational psychologists are of the

view that student’s motivation is an indispensable requirement for efficient

learning to take place. Fontana (1981) believed that, in the event of

insufficient motivation to learn, the outcome of such learning will be

unsatisfactory.

Many studies about academic motivational levels shows significant

differences in the students motivational level in terms of variables. In a study

of Motivational Levels among Traditional and Open Learning Undergraduate

Students conducted in India, results showed that there exist significant

differences in the level of motivation between the students of Traditional

Learning and Open Learning. In a similar study entitled “Academic

Motivational Levels of Students Study in Different Faculties in terms of Certain

Variables” conducted in Turkey, statistically significant differences between

academic motivational levels based on age range, gender, classes and

departments were found. Moreover, a study examining the motivational levels

of students in e-learning in Thailand also showed significant differences in the

level of motivation between the different degree levels of students.

Moving from face to face presence to virtual contact, the learning

experience becomes disembodied, virtual not actual, affecting both student

learning and the organization of schools. With Covid-19 affecting all the

aspects of the society including the Filipino Learners, institutions have find

7
ways to still continue and provide education amid this pandemic. The

Department of Education (DepEd) has pushed for learning continuity and

created alternative learning modalities that go beyond the four walls of the

classroom. The immediate solution to the closure of schools is distance

learning. With the advent of the Internet and the World Wide Web, the

potential for reaching learners around the world increased greatly. Online

learning has become popular because of its potential for providing more

flexible access to content and instruction at any time, from any place. The

focus entails on increasing the availability of learning experiences for learners

who cannot attend traditional face-to-face offerings.

Furthermore, a person’s education is closely linked to their life chances,

income, and well-being (Battle and Lewis 2002). Therefore, it is important to

have a clear understanding of what benefits or hinders one’s educational

attainment. Studies have repeatedly found that socioeconomic status affects

student outcomes (Baharudin and Luster 1998, Jeynes 2002, Eamon 2005,

Majoribanks 1996, Hochschild 2003, McNeal 2001, Seyfried 1998). Family SES

sets the stage for for students’ academic performance both by directly

providing resources at home and by indirectly providing the social capital that

is necessary to succeed in school (Coleman, 1988).

3. METHODOLOGY

3.1 Participants

The participants of this study are the Grade 12 students of St. Paul

University Iloilo who are attending classes through New Normal Learning.

8
 Using Sloven’s Formula, the researchers were able to get the sample size

of 180 participants out of 326 Grade 12 students, who will be representing

the whole population. Stratified Random Sampling technique was used in

choosing the respondents, whereas, the whole population was stratified

by sections to which the whole Grade 12 students will have an equal

chance to be a participant.

3.2 Methods

This study is designed to be quantitative which is to quantify data and

generalize results from a sample to the population of interest. The

samples are usually in a large number of cases representing the

population of interest.

The method used in this study is Questionnaire Method.

Questionnaire is an instrument in research that consists of a list of

questions and choices of answers which is used to gather specific

information from the respondents, relevant to the study. Questionnaires

typically contain multiple choice questions, attitude scales, closed

questions, and open-ended questions.

The research instrument for this study are through standardized

questionnaires. The researchers adapted the questionnaire from Academic

Motivation Scale (AMS) one of the most frequently used scales to

measure motivation according to self-determination theory. Vallerand et al.

(1992, 1993) developed the 28-item AMS. The five-factor variant of the study

questionnaire was used here because of its correspondence with the

9
 original proposal from Deci and Ryan (1 = does not correspond at all,

5 = corresponds exactly). The study questionnaire was checked for

internal consistency. The study questionnaires, along with informed

written consent forms, were distributed to the grade 12 students by

the researchers.

Since face to face classes were not permitted in this school year, the

researchers sent the questionnaires through Online Platforms. The

questionnaires are in a google form that automatically stores responses

and are available to view anytime for the convenience of the researchers.

Before the questionnaires were administered, the researchers sought

permission from the teachers and advisers to conduct their study.

Accomplished questionnaires will be gathered. The data will be tallied,

computed, analyzed, and interpreted.

3.3 Ethical Issues

Permission was first sought and granted by the committees of the

school, before the questionnaire was administered. Participants were

guaranteed confidentiality and anonymity stated in the research

instrument.

3.4 Analysis

The data collected will be subjected to a detailed analysis. Using

Descriptive and Inferential Statictical Tools such as Mean (Descriptive

Statistics), T-test and ANOVA (Inferential Statistics). The respondents’

10
 level of motivation was assessed by 28 questions; each of these questions

had possible answers arranged in five-point Likert scale, these points

were used to calculate the mean. The mean motivation score difference

between variables were calculated using Inferential Statistics. To interpret

the mean score for students’ motivational level, the researchers adopted

the interpreting procedure designed by Best (1981) and Degang (2010).

The mean score for each item indicated the level of students’ motivation;

the higher score indicated that students had high motivation, while the

lower score indicated low motivation.The data will be analyzed by the

researchers with the help of a statistician using tabular method. The

results will be shown on a table with multiple rows and columns.

4. Results

There were 180 (100%) respondents, who participated in this study. 40

(22.2%) of them were Male and 140 (77.8%) were Female. When grouped

according to Internet Connectivity, 31 (17.2%) out of 180 respondents have

Poor Connection, while 95 (52.8%) have Intermittent Connection, and 54

(30.0%) have Steady Connection. In terms of their Socioeconomic Status, 40

(22.2%) have Low Income, 33 (18.3%) are in Lower Middle, 66 (36.7%) are

in Middle Class, 28 (15.6%) are in Upper Middle, and 13 (7.2%) have High

Income. Result shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Profile of the Respondents as to Variables

Category f %
Entire Group 180 100.00
Sex

11
 Male 40 22.2
Female 140 77.8
Internet Connectivity
Poor Connection 31 17.2
Intermittent Connection 95 52.8
Steady Connection 54 30.0
Socio-economic Status
Low Income 40 22.2
Lower Middle 33 18.3
Middle 66 36.7
Upper Middle 28 15.6
High Income 13 7.2

The Level of Motivation as a Whole has an average mean score of 3.41

which fall into the category of ‘high’ motivation towards New Normal Learning

as indicated in the Motivational Level Interpretation. In terms of Sex, Male

respondents with a mean score of 3.48 fall into the category of ‘high’

motivational level while Female respondents with a mean score of 3.41 also

falls on the same category of ‘high’ motivational level. When grouped

according to Internet Connectivity, those who have Intermittent Connection

with a mean score of 3.48 and Steady Connection with a mean score of 3.45

are both interpreted as ‘high’ motivational level while those who have Poor

Connection fall on the ‘average’ motivational level category with a mean score

of 3.17. According to the respondents’ Socioeconomic Status, those who are

in Low Income Class with a mean score of 3.28 and Middle Class with a mean

score of 3.34 both fall into the ‘average’ motivational level category while

those who are in Lower Middle Class with a mean score of 3.42, Upper Middle

Class with a mean score of 3.65, and High Income Class with a mean score of

3.65 are interpreted as ‘high’ motivational level. Table 2 shown below.

Table 2. Level of Motivation as a Whole and in terms of Profile

12
 Category Mean SD Motivational Level
Entire Group 3.41 .550 High Level
Sex
Male 3.48 .603 High Level
Female 3.41 .536 High Level
Internet Connectivity
Poor Connection 3.17 .710 Average Level
Intermittent Connection 3.48 .488 High Level
Steady Connection 3.45 .522 High Level
Socioeconomic Status
Low Income 3.28 .606 Average Level
Lower Middle 3.42 .475 High Level
Middle 3.34 .497 Average Level
Upper Middle 3.65 .512 High Level
High Income 3.65 .717 High Level

Scale Mean Range Score Range Motivational Level

5 corresponds exactly 4.21 – 5.00 very high
4 corresponds a lot 3.41 – 4.20 high
3 corresponds moderately 2.61 – 3.40 average
2 corresponds a little 1.81 – 2.60 low
1 does not correspond at all 1.00 – 1.80 very low

T-test result shows no significant difference on the motivation level of the

respondents towards the new normal learning when they were according to

sex, t178 = .795, p = .428. The two-tailed probability of .428 was greater than

the set significance level of .05. Result further implies that the motivational

level of both male and female respondents do not vary from each other.

Result shown in table 3.

Table 3. Difference on the Level of Motivation towards New Normal

Learning as to Sex

Compared Means df tvalue Sig.(2-tailed) Interpretation

Sex
Male
178 .795 .428 Not Significant
Female

13
 One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) result shows a significant

difference on the level of motivation towards the new normal learning when

respondents were grouped as to internet connectivity, F(2, 177) = 3.883, p

= .022. The two-tailed probability of .022 was less than the set significance

level of .05. Scheffe post-hoc test result further revealed that the

motivational level of those with poor internet connection differ from those

with intermittent internet connection. Result shown in table 3a.

Table 3a. Difference on the Level of Motivation towards New Normal

Learning as to Internet Connectivity

Sources of df Sum of Mean Fvalue Sig. Interpretation

(2-tailed)
Variances Square Square
s
Between Groups 2 2.280 1.140
Within Groups 177 51.964 .294 3.883 .022 Significant
Total 179 54.244

Multiple Comparisons

(I) CONNECT (J) CONNECT Mean Std. Sig. 95% Confidence Interval
Difference (I- Error Lower Upper
J) Bound Bound

POOR INTERMITTENT CONNECTION -.30696* .11207 .025 -.5836 -.0303

CONNECTION
STEADY CONNECTION -.27676 .12209 .079 -.5782 .0246
*. The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level.

One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) result shows a significant

difference on the level of motivation towards the new normal learning when

respondents are grouped as to socioeconomic status, F(4, 175) = 2.913, p

= .023. The two-tailed probability of .023 was less than the set significance

level of .05. Result further implies that the motivation level towards the new

normal learning differ when respondents are grouped as to socioeconomic

status. Result shown in table 3b.

14
 Table 3b. Difference on the Level of Motivation towards New Normal
Learning as to Socioeconomic Status

Sources of df Sum of Mean Fvalue Sig. Interpretation

(2-tailed)
Variances Square Square
s
Between Groups 4 3.387 .847
Within Groups 175 50.857 .291 2.913 .023 Significant
Total 179 54.244

5. Discussions

The participants of this study are the 180 grade 12 students of St. Paul

University Iloilo. 40 of them are male and 140 are female. When grouped

according to Internet Connectivity, 31 have Poor Connection, while 95 have

Intermittent Connection, and 54 have Steady Connection. In terms of their

Socioeconomic Status, 40 are in Low Income class, 33 are in Lower Middle

class, 66 are in Middle Class, 28 are in Upper Middle class, and 13 are in High

Income class.

According to the data gathered from the 180 respondents of this study,

Findings revealed that the overall level of motivation has a mean score of

3.41 and a standard deviation of .550 falls into the category of ‘high’ level of

motivation as indicated in the Motivational Level interpretation. This implies

that students have high motivation towards New Normal Learning.

Moreover, T-test result shows no significant difference on the level of

motivation towards New Normal Learning when respondents are grouped

according to Sex. The two tailed probability of .428 was greater than the set

significance level of .05. Results further imply that the level of motivation of

male and female respondents do not vary from each other. Both male with a

15
mean of 3.48 and female with a mean of 3.41 have high level of motivation.

Findings of One-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) shows a significant

difference on the level of motivation towards New Normal Learning when

respondents are grouped according to their Internet Connectivity. The two

tailed probability of .022 is less than the set significance level of of .05.

Scheffe post-hoc test result further revealed that the level of motivation of

those who have poor internet connection vary from those who have

intermittent and steady internet connection. Students who experience Poor

Internet Connection with a mean of 3.17 have an ‘average’ level of motivation

while those who experience Intermittent Connection with a mean of 3.48 and

Steady Connection with a mean of 3.45 have ‘high’ level of motivation. This

implies that the level of motivation when respondents are classified as to

internet connectivity vary from each other.

In terms of respondents’ socioeconomic status, One-way Analysis of

Variance (ANOVA) revealed that there is a significant difference on the level

of motivation when respondents are grouped as to socioeconomic status. The

two-tailed probability of .023 was less than the set significance level of .05.

Students who are in Low Income Class with a mean of 3.28 and Middle Class

with a mean of 3.34 have an ‘average’ level of motivation while those who are

in Lower Middle with a mean of 3.42, Upper Middle with a mean of 3.65, and

High Income Class with a mean of 3.65 have ‘high’ level of motivation.

Results further implies that the level of motivation towards new normal

learning differ when respondents are classified by socioeconomic status.

16
 The results further reveal that the hypothesis is accepted only when

respondents are classified according to Internet Connectivity and

Socioeconomic status as it showed significant differences on the level of

motivation towards New Normal learning of the grade 12 students. However,

when grouped according to Sex, the hypothesis is rejected because there

shows no difference in the level of motivation of both male and female.

6. Conclusions

This study was conducted to determine the level of motivation of grade

12 students towards New Normal Learning. The findings of this research

conclude that the students have high level of motivation towards New Normal

learning. Despite the current situation and the circumstances that may affect

this ‘new’ mode of learning, students are still motivated to learn and acquire

knowledge in the comfort of their homes. Also, this study compared mean

differences between Sex, Internet Connectivity, and Socioeconomic Status.

Results further revealed that there is a significant difference in the level of

motivation when respondents are classified according to Internet Connectivity

and Socioeconomic status. Researchers conclude that this factors affect the

motivational level of students, especially in this time of pandemic. But when

grouped as to sex, both have the same level of motivation. Therefore, no

difference in the motivational level is found between male and female

respondents.

However, overall results still indicates a high level of motivation. The

students knew that in these trying times, their educational opportunity is

17
significant since not many students have no access to this chance and chose

to sacrifice their education due to circumstances.

In summary, the researchers believe that the current study gives useful

information on the level of motivation of the grade 12 students towards New

Normal Learning.

7. Recommendations

The following recommendations were based on the findings and

conclusions made for the study.

1. It is recommended that the teachers and students must both be

considerate of each other as this new education system may affect the

process of learning and teaching.

2. Teachers can come up with teaching strategies that can motivate their

students to learn in this time of crisis.

3. Schools should organize their learning systems thoroughly so that it will

provide a convenient way of learning for the students.

4. The researchers recommend that future studies similar to this use a wider

scope of gathering data so that results will be accurate coming from a large

number of respondents.

5. The future researchers must make or find the right survey questionnaires

fit to their study in order to avoid sampling errors.

6. Future studies similar to this may investigate a different set of variables but

should still relate to the concept of the study.

18
8. References

Amrai, K. et al. (2011). “The relationship between academic motivation and

academic achievement students.” Retrieved from

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877042811002904

Balacuit, C., & Inabangan, J., (2019). “Influence of motivation towards the

academic performance in games and sports among BSEdMAPEH interns in

SDSSU-main campus.” Retrieved from

http://www.kheljournal.com/archives/2019/vol6issue3/PartD/6-3-30-161.pdf

Cherry, K. (2020). What is Motivation?. Retrieved from

https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-motivation-2795378

De Beguio, G.N., et al. (2018). “MOTIVATION AND ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE

OF GRADE 12-ICTSTUDENTS IN NORTHLINK TECHNOLOGICAL COLLEGE.”

Retrieved from

https://www.academia.edu/39993334/Motivation_and_Academic_Performanc

Excite Education. (2020). Purpose of Online Class Retrieved from

https://www.excite.com/education/education/purpose-of-education

19
Gbollie, C., & Keamu, H.P., (2017). "Student Academic Performance: The Role

of Motivation, Strategies, and Perceived Factors Hindering Liberian Junior and

Senior High School Students Learning", Education Research International.

Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/1789084

Haarms, R. (2014). “Student motivation in Asian countries and its impact on

academic success for second language university students.” Asian Journal of

Educational Research. Retrieved from

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/290263356_Student_motivation_in

_Asian_countries_and_its_impact_on_academic_success_for_second_languag

e_university_students/citation/download

Hasan, A., et al. (2010). “A Study of University Students’ Motivation and Its

Relationship with Their Academic Performance.” International Journal of

Business and Management. Retrieved from

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/42385758_A_Study_of_University_

Students'_Motivation_and_Its_Relationship_with_Their_Academic_Performanc

e/citation/download

Huang, B. & Hew, K. F. (2016). Measuring Learners’ Motivation Level in

Massive Open Online Courses. Retrieved from http://www.ijiet.org/vol6/788-

A001.pdf

20
Javaeed et al., (2019). Assessment of Academic Motivation Level of

Undergraduate Medical Students of Azad Kashmir, Pakistan. Retrieved from

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6538102/

Keskin, O. & Korkutata, A. (2018). Reviewing Academic Motivation Levels of

Students Study in Different Faculties in Terms of Certain Variables (Sakarya

University Case). Retrieved from

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/329421347_Reviewing_Academic_

Motivation_Levels_of_Students_Study_in_Different_Faculties_in_Terms_of_Ce

rtain_Variables_Sakarya_University_Case

Kubischta, F. (2014). “Engagement and Motivation: Questioning students on

study-motivation, engagement and study strategies.” Retrieved from

https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/38108637.pdf

Lai, E. (2011). “Motivation: A literature review.” Retrieved from

http://images.pearsonassessments.com/images/tmrs/motivation_review_final.

pdf

Muge Yukseloglu, S. & Hulya Karaguven, M. (2013). Academic Motivation

Levels of Technical High School Students. Retrieved from

(https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S187704281304648X)

Muhammad, A.S., et al. (2014). “IMPACT OF MOTIVATION ON STUDENTS’

ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE: A CASE STUDY OF UNIVERSITY SULTAN ZAINAL

21
ABIDIN STUDENTS.” Retrieved from

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?

doi=10.1.1.695.5682&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Njiru, J.N. (2003). “Measuring academic motivation to achieve for high school

students using a Rasch measurement model.” Retrieved from

https://ro.ecu.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.com/

&httpsredir=1&article=2321&context=theses

Online Class Definition and Meaning. (2019, October 19). Retrieved

September 26, 2020, from

https://tophat.com/glossary/o/online-class/#:~:text=An%20online%20class

%20is%20a,students%20and%20their%20course%20instructor

Oxford University Press (OUP). (2020). motivation. Retrieved September 26,

2020, from https://www.lexico.com/definition/motivation?

fbclid=IwAR3UA7XoxlA288_Xhl2KPWW_FcT

Oxford University Press (OUP). (2020). student. Retrieved September 26,

2020, from https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/student?

fbclid=IwAR0IFacI3UIykKGYO633Yd394wZjHw9Q12c5koyt638UaHL3GKYUwM

RGf7w

22
Singh, S., Singh, A., & Singh, K. (2012). Motivation Levels among Traditional

and Open Learning Undergraduate Students in India. Retrieved from

http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/1050/2196

Steinmayr, R., et al. (2019). “The Importance of Students’ Motivation for

Their Academic Achievement – Replicating and Extending Previous Findings.”

Retrieved from

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01730/full

Top Hat. (2018). Online Class. Retrieved from

https://tophat.com/glossary/o/online-class/#:~:text=An%20online%20class

%20is%20a%20course%20conducted%20over%20the

%20Internet.&text=Online%20classes%20are%20generally%20self,such

%20as%20edX%20or%20Coursera

Tuan, H., Chin, C., & Shieh, S. (2005). “The development of a questionnaire

to measure students' motivation towards science learning. International

Journal of Science Education.” Retrieved from

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228337132_The_development_of_

a_questionnaire_to_measure_students'_motivation_towards_science_learning

Vallerand, R.J., Blais, M.R., Brière, N.M., & Pelletier, L.G. (1989). Construction

et validation de l'Échelle de Motivation en Éducation (EME). Revue canadienne

des sciences du comportement, 21, 323-349.

23
Venkatesh, B. (2018). Motivation: Meaning, Definition, Nature and Types.

Retrieved from

https://www.yourarticlelibrary.com/entrepreneurship/motivation-

entrepreneurship/motivation-meaning-definition-nature-and-types/53285

Appendices

Letter of Permission to Conduct Research Study

ST. PAUL UNIVERSITY ILOILO

Gen. Luna St., Iloilo City
Senior High School Department

To Whom It May Concern,

Greetings!

We are the from the Grade 12- STEM- F students and we would like to ask
permission to conduct our research entitled "The Level of Motivation towards New
Normal Learning of the Grade 12 Students of St. Paul University Iloilo" as a strand
requirement in the Senior High School, Basic Education Department.
With this we are hoping that our request will be approved and we can conduct
the study by this week. The researchers assure the confidentiality of the answers of
the participants.
We are hoping for your kind consideration. Your response will help in
completing the researchers study and making it a success.

Respectfully yours,

Nicole Alexandrein Gulmatico

Lizdel Shanez Lima
Anne Paulene Sobretodo
Mary Zusie Lyn Tambalo
Jann Paul Gorriceta

Noted by:

24
MRS. GERALDINE MALECOSIO

Research Adviser

Consent Form

Dear Participant,

Greetings!

The researchers, Lizdel Shanez Lima, Nicole Alexandrein Gulmatico, Mary

Zusie Lyn Tambalo, Anne Paulene Sobretodo, and Jann Paul Gorriceta are

conducting their study entitled “The Level of Motivation towards New Normal

Learning of the Grade 12 students of St. Paul University Iloilo” in fulfillment of

the requirements for Practical Research 2.

This study aims to determine the Level of Motivation towards New Normal

Learning of the Grade 12 students of St. Paul University Iloilo. The

researchers would like to ask for your time to answer this questionnaire.

Participant data will be kept confidential, all the information gathered

will be used for the study alone. Your responses to this survey will be kept

anonymous. Your participation in this study is voluntary, you may decline to

answer any time.

If you have questions any time about this study, you may contact

Lizdel Shanez Lima through email lizdellima@gmail.com. Thank you and God

Bless!

Yours Truly,
Lizdel Shanez Lima

25
 Nicole Alexandrein Gulmatico
Mary Zusie Lyn Tambalo
Anne Paulene Sobretodo
Jann Paul Gorriceta
Noted By:
Miss Geraldine Malecosio
Research Adviser
Research Questionnaire

Part I: Profile of the Respondents

Name (Optional): ____________________________________________

Sex:

Male _____

Female _____

Internet Connectivity:

Poor Connection _____

Intermittent Connection _____

Steady Connection _____

Socioeconomic Status (Estimated Monthly Family Income according

to Philippine Institute for Development Studies):

Low Income (below P21, 914 monthly income) _____

Lower Middle (P21, 914 - P43, 828) _____

Middle (P43, 828 - P76, 669) _____

Upper Middle (P76, 669 - P131, 484) _____

High Income (above P131, 484) _____

26
 Please check your response to the items. Rate statements according

to the choices below. The survey was adapted from Academic Motivation

Survey (AMS).

Part II: Motivation Survey

Please read the questions carefully and place a check in the box that applies.

1 - “does not correspond at all”, 2 - ”corresponds a little”, 3 - ”corresponds

moderately”, 4 - ”corresponds a lot”, 5 - ”corresponds exactly”

I attend classes.. 1 2 3 4 5

1. Because I experience pleasure and

satisfaction while learning new things.

2. For the pleasure I experience when I

discover new things never seen before.

3. For the pleasure I experience in

broadening my knowledge about subjects

which appeal to me

4. Because my studies allow me to

continue to learn about many things that

interest me.

5. For the pleasure that I experience

while surpassing myself in my studies.

6. For the pleasure that I experience

while I am surpassing myself in one of

my personal accomplishments.

27
7. For the satisfaction I feel when I am in

the process of accomplishing difficult

academic activities.

8. Because high school allows me to

experience a personal satisfaction in my

quest for excellence in my studies.

9. Because I really like going to school.

10. Because for me, school is fun.

11. For the pleasure that I experience

when I am taken by discussions with

interesting teachers.

12. For the ‘high’ feeling that I

experience while reading about various

interesting subjects.

13. Because I think that a high school

education will help me better prepare for

the career I have chosen.

14. Because eventually it will enable me

to enter the job market in a field that I

like.

15. Because this will help me make a

better choice regarding my career

orientation.

16. Because I want to show myself that I

28
can succeed in my studies.

17. To prove to myself that I am capable

of completing my high school degree.

18. Because of the fact that when I

succeed in school I feel important.

19. To show myself that I am an

intelligent person.

20. Because I want to show myself that I

can succeed in my studies.

21. Because I need at least a high-school

degree in order to find a high paying job

later on.

22. In order to obtain a more prestigious

job later on.

23. Because I want to have ‘the good life’

later on.

24. In order to have a better salary later

on.

25. Honestly, I don’t know; I really feel

that I am wasting my time in school.

26. I once had good reasons for going yo

school; however, now I wonder whether

I should continue.

27. I can’t see why I go to school and

29
frankly, I couldn’t care less.

28. I don’t know; I can’t understand

what I am doing in school.

30
 Results

Frequency Table
GENDER

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

MALE 40 22.2 22.2 22.2

Valid FEMALE 140 77.8 77.8 100.0

Total 180 100.0 100.0

CONNECT

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

POOR CONNECTION 31 17.2 17.2 17.2

INTERMITTENT CONNECTION 95 52.8 52.8 70.0

Valid
STEADY CONNECTION 54 30.0 30.0 100.0

Total 180 100.0 100.0

SES

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent

LOW INCOME 40 22.2 22.2 22.2

LOWER MIDDLE 33 18.3 18.3 40.6

MIDDLE 66 36.7 36.7 77.2

Valid
UPPER MIDDLE 28 15.6 15.6 92.8

HIGH INCOME 13 7.2 7.2 100.0

Total 180 100.0 100.0

Means
S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 S9 S10 S11 S12 S13 S14 S15 S16 S17 S18 S19 S20 S21 S22 S23 S24 S25 S26 S27 S28 OVERALL * GENDER

31
GENDER S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 S9 S10 S11 S12 S13 S14 S15 S16 S17 S18 S19 S20 S21 S22 S23 S24 S25 S26 S27 S28 OVER
ALL

Mean 3.38 3.53 3.83 3.78 3.28 3.50 3.23 3.28 3.48 3.55 3.58 3.40 3.80 3.80 3.80 3.75 3.63 3.30 3.20 3.78 3.75 3.88 4.08 4.08 2.83 2.85 2.68 2.35 3.4755

MALE N 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40

SD .952 .905 .984 1.050 .960 .934 1.025 1.154 .933 .904 .844 .928 1.114 1.018 .911 .981 1.005 1.159 1.114 1.025 1.006 .992 .971 .997 1.357 1.272 1.248 1.350 .60260
Mean 3.14 3.51 3.51 3.56 3.39 3.61 3.45 3.39 3.16 3.19 3.37 3.26 3.83 3.77 3.74 3.89 3.99 3.72 3.17 3.96 3.49 3.93 4.36 4.21 2.15 2.34 2.04 1.98 3.3969
FEMALE N 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140 140
SD .836 .910 .885 .969 .919 .903 .900 .887 .954 1.024 .939 .901 .959 .939 .940 .960 .974 1.073 .981 .959 1.166 .987 .899 .965 1.169 1.279 1.166 1.160 .53570
Mean 3.19 3.51 3.58 3.61 3.37 3.58 3.40 3.37 3.23 3.27 3.42 3.29 3.82 3.78 3.76 3.86 3.91 3.63 3.18 3.92 3.54 3.92 4.30 4.18 2.30 2.46 2.18 2.06 3.4144

Total N 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180

SD .866 .906 .915 .989 .927 .909 .931 .951 .956 1.007 .921 .906 .992 .955 .931 .964 .990 1.104 1.009 .974 1.135 .985 .921 .972 1.241 1.292 1.211 1.211 .55049

S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 S9 S10 S11 S12 S13 S14 S15 S16 S17 S18 S19 S20 S21 S22 S23 S24 S25 S26 S27 S28 OVERALL * CONNECT

CONNECT S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 S9 S10 S11 S12 S13 S14 S15 S16 S17 S18 S19 S20 S21 S22 S23 S24 S25 S26 S27 S28 OVER
ALL

Mean 2.94 3.19 3.13 3.19 2.97 3.23 2.74 2.81 3.00 3.13 2.90 2.84 3.55 3.35 3.35 3.55 3.45 3.55 3.03 3.65 3.32 3.65 4.06 3.97 2.42 2.81 2.45 2.48 3.1694
POOR
CONNECTION N 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31 31

SD .998 1.046 1.147 1.138 .983 .990 .815 .946 .966 1.024 .831 .860 .995 .950 .915 1.028 .995 1.028 1.048 .985 1.166 1.082 .998 1.048 1.205 1.250 1.234 1.262 .70956
Mean 3.20 3.51 3.63 3.64 3.46 3.57 3.51 3.47 3.28 3.38 3.51 3.42 3.88 3.81 3.83 3.99 4.04 3.76 3.33 4.08 3.61 4.09 4.40 4.31 2.18 2.39 2.07 1.98 3.4763
INTERMITTENT
N 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95
CONNECTION
SD .820 .874 .864 .933 .932 .859 .921 .873 .942 .991 .955 .929 .921 .879 .883 .928 .956 1.099 .983 .930 1.094 .851 .804 .888 1.229 1.315 1.151 1.130 .48838
Mean 3.33 3.70 3.76 3.78 3.43 3.81 3.59 3.50 3.26 3.17 3.56 3.31 3.87 3.96 3.85 3.80 3.93 3.44 3.00 3.78 3.56 3.76 4.26 4.09 2.44 2.37 2.20 1.96 3.4461
STEADY
N 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54 54
CONNECTION
SD .847 .838 .775 .945 .838 .892 .858 .986 .975 1.023 .816 .820 1.100 1.027 .979 .959 .988 1.144 1.009 1.003 1.192 1.098 1.049 1.051 1.284 1.263 1.294 1.288 .52195
Mean 3.19 3.51 3.58 3.61 3.37 3.58 3.40 3.37 3.23 3.27 3.42 3.29 3.82 3.78 3.76 3.86 3.91 3.63 3.18 3.92 3.54 3.92 4.30 4.18 2.30 2.46 2.18 2.06 3.4144

Total N 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180

SD .866 .906 .915 .989 .927 .909 .931 .951 .956 1.007 .921 .906 .992 .955 .931 .964 .990 1.104 1.009 .974 1.135 .985 .921 .972 1.241 1.292 1.211 1.211 .55049

S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 S9 S10 S11 S12 S13 S14 S15 S16 S17 S18 S19 S20 S21 S22 S23 S24 S25 S26 S27 S28 OVERALL * SES

32
SES S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 S9 S10 S11 S12 S13 S14 S15 S16 S17 S18 S19 S20 S21 S22 S23 S24 S25 S26 S27 S28 OVERA
LL

Mean 3.00 3.25 3.28 3.30 3.13 3.33 3.03 3.05 3.30 3.38 3.23 3.30 3.80 3.58 3.65 3.75 3.65 3.63 3.08 3.85 3.33 3.85 4.25 4.08 2.05 2.60 2.10 2.00 3.2785
LOW
N 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40
INCOME
SD .877 .981 1.012 1.043 .939 .829 .832 .959 1.018 1.079 .947 .966 .966 .903 .949 .981 1.051 1.005 1.047 .975 1.118 1.001 1.006 1.163 1.037 1.257 1.033 1.086 .60638
Mean 3.15 3.48 3.64 3.64 3.42 3.64 3.39 3.39 3.24 3.33 3.42 3.30 3.79 3.79 3.85 4.09 3.82 3.48 3.21 3.91 3.30 3.97 4.15 4.09 2.36 2.48 2.21 2.27 3.4230
LOWER
N 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 33 33
MIDDLE
SD .667 .755 .859 .895 .867 .822 .899 1.059 .969 .736 .902 .728 1.023 1.023 1.004 .879 .983 1.176 .992 .914 1.075 .810 .834 .805 1.194 1.349 1.219 1.306 .47543
Mean 3.09 3.44 3.59 3.58 3.38 3.47 3.39 3.36 3.06 3.14 3.32 3.18 3.73 3.68 3.68 3.70 3.91 3.42 3.06 3.85 3.70 3.83 4.32 4.20 2.23 2.33 2.09 1.91 3.3445
MIDDLE N 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66 66
SD .872 .897 .841 .962 .941 .915 .909 .853 .959 1.080 .862 .975 1.031 .979 .880 1.022 .956 1.124 1.006 1.026 1.081 1.001 .947 1.011 1.275 1.257 1.199 1.077 .49684
Mean 3.54 3.89 3.86 3.96 3.57 4.11 3.93 3.71 3.43 3.36 3.75 3.46 3.89 4.11 3.89 3.96 4.25 4.11 3.43 4.14 3.75 4.11 4.36 4.32 2.57 2.36 2.29 2.21 3.6536
UPPER
N 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28 28
MIDDLE
SD .838 .786 .932 .962 .836 .786 .900 .937 .920 1.062 .887 .881 .994 .875 1.031 .962 .928 .994 .920 .932 1.206 1.031 .951 .819 1.399 1.311 1.357 1.397 .51200
Mean 3.69 3.92 3.77 3.85 3.46 3.69 3.46 3.54 3.38 3.31 3.77 3.38 4.31 4.15 3.92 4.15 4.15 4.00 3.46 4.00 3.62 4.00 4.62 4.38 2.69 2.77 2.54 2.15 3.6500
HIGH
N 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13
INCOME
SD 1.032 1.038 .927 1.068 1.127 1.182 1.050 .967 .768 .947 1.092 .870 .751 .801 .760 .689 .987 1.080 1.127 1.000 1.387 1.225 .650 .870 1.377 1.481 1.506 1.573 .71652
Mean 3.19 3.51 3.58 3.61 3.37 3.58 3.40 3.37 3.23 3.27 3.42 3.29 3.82 3.78 3.76 3.86 3.91 3.63 3.18 3.92 3.54 3.92 4.30 4.18 2.30 2.46 2.18 2.06 3.4144

Total N 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180 180

SD .866 .906 .915 .989 .927 .909 .931 .951 .956 1.007 .921 .906 .992 .955 .931 .964 .990 1.104 1.009 .974 1.135 .985 .921 .972 1.241 1.292 1.211 1.211 .55049

Means
MOTIVA_LEVEL * GENDER
MOTIVA_LEVEL
33
GENDER Mean N Std. Deviation

MALE 3.4755 40 .60260

FEMALE 3.3969 140 .53570
Total 3.4144 180 .55049

MOTIVA_LEVEL * CONNECT
MOTIVA_LEVEL

CONNECT Mean N Std. Deviation

POOR CONNECTION 3.1694 31 .70956

INTERMITTENT CONNECTION 3.4763 95 .48838
STEADY CONNECTION 3.4461 54 .52195
Total 3.4144 180 .55049

MOTIVA_LEVEL * SES
MOTIVA_LEVEL

SES Mean N Std. Deviation

LOW INCOME 3.2785 40 .60638

LOWER MIDDLE 3.4230 33 .47543
MIDDLE 3.3445 66 .49684
UPPER MIDDLE 3.6536 28 .51200
HIGH INCOME 3.6500 13 .71652
Total 3.4144 180 .55049

T-Test
Group Statistics
34
 GENDER N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean

MALE 40 3.4755 .60260 .09528

OVERALL
FEMALE 140 3.3969 .53570 .04528

Independent Samples Test

Levene's Test for Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means

F Sig. t df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean Difference Std. Error 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference
Difference Lower Upper

Equal variances assumed 2.608 .108 .795 178 .428 .07857 .09880 -.11639 .27353
OVERALL
Equal variances not assumed .745 57.774 .459 .07857 .10549 -.13261 .28975

OnewaY
ANOVA
OVERALL

Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Between Groups 2.280 2 1.140 3.883 .022

Within Groups 51.964 177 .294
Total 54.244 179

Post Hoc Tests

Multiple Comparisons

35
Dependent Variable: OVERALL
Scheffe

(I) CONNECT (J) CONNECT Mean Difference (I- Std. Error Sig. 95% Confidence Interval
J) Lower Bound Upper Bound

INTERMITTENT CONNECTION -.30696* .11207 .025 -.5836 -.0303

POOR CONNECTION
STEADY CONNECTION -.27676 .12209 .079 -.5782 .0246
POOR CONNECTION .30696 *
.11207 .025 .0303 .5836
INTERMITTENT CONNECTION
STEADY CONNECTION .03020 .09234 .948 -.1978 .2582
POOR CONNECTION .27676 .12209 .079 -.0246 .5782
STEADY CONNECTION
INTERMITTENT CONNECTION -.03020 .09234 .948 -.2582 .1978

*. The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level.

Homogeneous SubsetS
OVERALL
Scheffe a,b

CONNECT N Subset for alpha = 0.05

1 2

POOR CONNECTION 31 3.1694

STEADY CONNECTION 54 3.4461
INTERMITTENT CONNECTION 95 3.4763
Sig. 1.000 .963

Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are displayed.

a. Uses Harmonic Mean Sample Size = 48.937.
b. The group sizes are unequal. The harmonic mean of the group sizes is used.
Type I error levels are not guaranteed.

ANOVA
OVERALL

Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

36
Between Groups 3.387 4 .847 2.913 .023
Within Groups 50.857 175 .291
Total 54.244 179

Post Hoc TestS

Multiple Comparisons
Dependent Variable: OVERALL
Scheffe
(I) SES (J) SES Mean Difference (I- Std. Error Sig. 95% Confidence Interval
J) Lower Bound Upper Bound
LOWER MIDDLE -.14453 .12677 .861 -.5392 .2502
MIDDLE -.06605 .10802 .984 -.4024 .2703
LOW INCOME
UPPER MIDDLE -.37507 .13283 .098 -.7886 .0385
HIGH INCOME -.37150 .17210 .328 -.9073 .1643
LOW INCOME .14453 .12677 .861 -.2502 .5392
MIDDLE .07848 .11493 .977 -.2793 .4363
LOWER MIDDLE
UPPER MIDDLE -.23054 .13851 .598 -.6618 .2007
HIGH INCOME -.22697 .17653 .799 -.7766 .3226
LOW INCOME .06605 .10802 .984 -.2703 .4024
LOWER MIDDLE -.07848 .11493 .977 -.4363 .2793
MIDDLE
UPPER MIDDLE -.30903 .12158 .173 -.6876 .0695
HIGH INCOME -.30545 .16358 .482 -.8147 .2038
LOW INCOME .37507 .13283 .098 -.0385 .7886
LOWER MIDDLE .23054 .13851 .598 -.2007 .6618
UPPER MIDDLE
MIDDLE .30903 .12158 .173 -.0695 .6876
HIGH INCOME .00357 .18092 1.000 -.5597 .5669
LOW INCOME .37150 .17210 .328 -.1643 .9073
LOWER MIDDLE .22697 .17653 .799 -.3226 .7766
HIGH INCOME
MIDDLE .30545 .16358 .482 -.2038 .8147
UPPER MIDDLE -.00357 .18092 1.000 -.5669 .5597

37